World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Which is why changes to spawn lists and tiers should have been given in advance and not the "hardest campaign ever" BS that failed to inform anyone about what was actually being proposed.

Time and again guys have posted here saying "tell us about changes before they happen" and we may be able to sooth hurt feelings in game on side chat, especially if the anger is just because some numbers were transposed wrongly within the many thousands of lines of code for spawn lists etc. If we expect 6 stus and none appear, or 2 Mattys and 16 appear guys will react. If we know what the numbers are meant to be then we can tell the Player Base that there is a mistake and that CRS are fixing it, We did get spawn list details at the start of this campaign, and that was a great step forward.

ian

You made a good point there transparency in that aspect would have been a good start, both sides would have had a good idea what was coming and would not have to vent frustration in the forum and that from both sides. Inf players saying F it on Allied side , Tankers saying F it on Axis side.

Both sides could have just came in here and said hey CRS this needs a tweaking here and there we don't have enough of that or there us to many of this to level things out and have both sides happy.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

CRS 2 is not to compare with CRS 1 regarding transparency. All opinions are followed up and discussed. But trolls lose credibility at some point, and so Rats’ attention.

CRS also copes with a team of volunteers where people contribute as much as they can for free. They received in counterpart some liberties to do so and they cannot have the immediate right answer to everything. Not to mention that any decision will always have its counter arguments. Unconstructive critics are not helping volunteers progress forward in this regards.

And I guarantee to everyone here that there are much more topics discussed internally at CRS with much more issues pointed out, more ideas, more debates, more disagreements... than in this whole public forum. Because CRS2 IS composed by the most dedicated players of the wwiiol community for the past 19 years.

As soon as I have some spare time I continue my work to help CRS get a better rational comprehension of the game, of its potential and its limits, with a better methodology than just personal convictions and emotions. I therefore read most of your posts, and compare these with game-related data (when I manage to get these as it requires coders), game design theories, WWII data and facts, military doctrines, benchmarking other games... I then write up related survey questions to validate a pragmatic modelisation among the different segments of our playerbase. This requires a reversed-engineering approach of the existing business and product since the old team has left no vision, information nor methodology (maybe it was written on a white board, but definitely erased since then).

And guess what? It’s XOOM that asked me to explore all this, because he DOES care.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

My squad dwindled, because people grew up, got wives and kids, got jobs, got more work than free time, joined the REAL airforce, lost interest in general, saw too few new aircraft over time.. some quit because they couldn't handle proper procedure (ie wingmanship, flight and squadron discipline) but NONE quit because the game as such was too hard or too challenging, or because of rainclouds or fishbowls. NONE of that mattered. I appreciate that players have all sorts of reasons to move on, but none of those so oft cited in threads here applied to my guys. And that's my 2c.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

My squad dwindled, because people grew up, got wives and kids, got jobs, got more work than free time, joined the REAL airforce, lost interest in general, saw too few new aircraft over time.. some quit because they couldn't handle proper procedure (ie wingmanship, flight and squadron discipline) but NONE quit because the game as such was too hard or too challenging, or because of rainclouds or fishbowls. NONE of that mattered. I appreciate that players have all sorts of reasons to move on, but none of those so oft cited in threads here applied to my guys. And that's my 2c.

Agree. The reasons people leave are multifaceted and there is no quick answers or fixes.

Saying people left because of boredom is like saying the Hindenburg crashed because of fire. It's an oversimplification and doesn't give any prognostic information on how to fix things.

Its just quarterbacking from behind the chain link fence and criticizing the coach with having a the guts to step in and make a positive change.

For all those ex-subs complaining here on a daily basis how about you step it up and help organize battles to reverse this perceived boredom of yours. How about you try to rally old squad members and actively work to recruit new ones? ask players like Augetout how much work that is.

Has only here complaining of about CRS "abandoning" the Steam community spent the fraction of the time they blow hot air in these forums to engage the WWIIOL steam community? Nope, because me and Zeb and the only ones who post on those forums.

There is a lot players can do to help the game that doesn't even require a subscription. But most seem to be more interested in trolling the forums with negativity without any constructive comments or seemingly any intention to do so.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

For all those ex-subs complaining here on a daily basis how about you step it up and help organize battles to reverse this perceived boredom of yours. How about you try to rally old squad members and actively work to recruit new ones? ask players like Augetout how much work that is.

you still don't understand... they quit for valid reasons.

the inability to set up and organize battles being one of them... play for the reasons you quit? dude

3 minutes ago, aismov said:

There is a lot players can do to help the game that doesn't even require a subscription. But most seem to be more interested in trolling the forums with negativity without any constructive comments or seemingly any intention to do so.

blind loyalty is even worse. if you see criticism as trolling (or obfuscate it into trolling : P )there's no question; your doing more damage than any troll could.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

So far all you've been able to do is repost the same 3 things over and over, and make excuses when players who are actually working to enact positive change call you out on you're trolling.

Nobody would have an issue if you had constructive criticism and actually back up your words with actions. Many of us, myself included, were unsubbed for years and came back because we saw positive change and have been working to bring about more of it.

Sorry, but the ball is very far in your court.

6 people like this

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

You ever wonder why Axis most of the time push the map west in tier 0 and tier 1 . It's because our Armor sucks and die most of the time after the 1st hit no matter where they get hit. So most go INF and stay INF till a higher tier might roll around .

Here i thought it had to do with the significant numbers advantage ...

Youre hilarious dre. Constantly whining about perceived allied advantage and completely unwilling to see the forrest through all the damn trees. If only german armor were as thick as your skull ...

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Nah, I'm being real. WWIIol advertised itself as F2P offering a trial in a rifleman and at the same time E.V.E got rid of it's trial and created Alpha accounts that got 50% access. You guys are behind and/or backwards in the gaming landscape. You can't call yourself F2P and not be f2p and expect people to not take exception. Not saying it was malice slicing the AA/AT gun out of f2p and selling it as DLC, it certainly wasn't bright and backed by market trends. You'll still ignore the fact that F2P based games are making more money and pulling more players than any subscription based game which is what all your competitors are doing.

Clearly we disagree. Perhaps I am wrong, though. One never knows for sure on these things. Perhaps you are correct in sitting on the sidelines, not playing the game, throwing constant darts at those (CRS) who are working towards returning the size of the community back to previous levels. Maybe constant attempts to put your .02 in as negative a way as humanly possible doesn't have a negative effect on the community. Maybe Post Scriptum, who charges $29.99 for the game and an additional fee for 'renting' a server, is not a direct competitor, thus your 'all our competitors are F2P' statement isn't pure poppycock. Perhaps World of Tanks is a direct competitor, despite all evidence to the contrary. Perhaps the best way to effect change in a game's development is to not play the game, and not volunteer to help, but to sit on the forums and continuously attack the credibility and skill level of the game developers.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Has any of the changes over last years led to any positive change in numbers? The answer seems to be NO. It's not working Xoom. Nerfing more weapons and make even more changes to spawnlists is not going to help. It never has and never will.

Nerf the lmgs and u lose those who learned to to handle them. Stop tankers and panzerplayers from having access to their units and u lose those as well. This is what is happening right now, isn't it?

Maybe some high voiced players enjoy all those changes but they will also leave when there are no more enemies to kill.

Maybe getting more players is not the goal here and then i will shut up and go somewhere else to a more populated game. But then be open about that please. I joined the game once for the promise of a massive online game and that is not what it is now.

That is not an accurate statement to make. CRS' efforts have led to positive changes in community member numbers, to be sure. Not up to 'the old days' yet, but certainly trending in an upwards direction for the past year-ish.

Any changes to the LMGs will not be 'nerfs'. Tankers and Panzerplayers will continue to have access to their chosen units.

There is a significant percentage of players who have enjoyed the recent changes, and there's a significant percentage of players who are in favor of moving more towards historical accuracy. It is clear that CRS will not do so at the expense of gameplay, while reserving the right to give some things a try here and there. Some changes will work, and some will not, but be honest with yourself---if the game today was the exact same as it was 15 years ago you'd already be gone.

Getting more players is a goal, but not by turning this game into red v blue or a pale version of COD, etc. Getting more players by improving that which makes WWIIOnline unique in the realm of MMOs, MilSims, FPS, etc., is the path forward. Mistakes will be made----and will be rectified. A lot (my opinion only) of the issues we have ingame right now would not be significant issues if more players were in-game at any given moment. This new version of CRS is better, imho, and I hope you stick with it as I will, to see how things progress.

Share on other sites

the inability to set up and organize battles being one of them... play for the reasons you quit? dude

blind loyalty is even worse. if you see criticism as trolling (or obfuscate it into trolling : P )there's no question; your doing more damage than any troll could.

No. It's the "whiny" part of the critique (i.e. if you don't see it my way well you are just ignorant and wrong), which seems to come through after someone repeatedly offers the same points over and over, as if CRS or others haven't heard it and generally provides no or little admission that CRS has done something correct (I mean the game is still going, despite huge challenges?).

I think this is a good place to insert the "balance" term.

Perhaps I am projecting, won't be the first time, lol, but that's what is somewhat irritating to me at least.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

So far all you've been able to do is repost the same 3 things over and over, and make excuses when players who are actually working to enact positive change call you out on you're trolling.

Nobody would have an issue if you had constructive criticism and actually back up your words with actions. Many of us, myself included, were unsubbed for years and came back because we saw positive change and have been working to bring about more of it.

Sorry, but the ball is very far in your court.

i called out the RAF cannon bug, i made Hatch's small arms data thread, i reported the small arms bugs, i posted 3 weeks of dead AO's... it was like that for 10 months and the pop nose dived from 3 AO's to 1 AO and taking towns without resistance. during all that time, even talking about bugs were labeled as trolling.

people working to enact positive change... trolling these guys? find an example for me.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

No. It's the "whiny" part of the critique (i.e. if you don't see it my way well you are just ignorant and wrong), which seems to come through after someone repeatedly offers the same points over and over, as if CRS or others haven't heard it and generally provides no or little admission that CRS has done something correct (I mean the game is still going, despite huge challenges?).

I think this is a good place to insert the "balance" term.

Perhaps I am projecting, won't be the first time, lol, but that's what is somewhat irritating to me at least.

regards

if there is ignorance, it's going both ways. the 3minFMS problem was soo obvious, it was soo blatant. it still is.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

For all those ex-subs complaining here on a daily basis how about you step it up and help organize battles to reverse this perceived boredom of yours. How about you try to rally old squad members and actively work to recruit new ones? ask players like Augetout how much work that is.

Can you, or someone else here please demonstrate how to organize a big, fun, organized combined arms battle? Because I am certain that this is not possible under the current game rules; unless the defender simply doesn't spawn in or has no HC online the attacker gets rolled every time no matter how organized he is. Just post a how-to video or something.

I came to the conclusion that things are too difficult awhile ago, and I think that I have provided pretty good reasoning as well as some evidence (my video of the Steam users getting spawncamped is still up). The response has always been for me to step it up and "use teamwork" but I don't see any examples of people successfully doing it. Meanwhile I can read and see how nearly every mechanic in the game is designed to remove any advantage that a larger organized group might have.

Xoom did organize a big event sometime last year, but it took several days of advertising and ingame announcement spam, augmented armor supply I think, and all he did really was roll a bunch of axis tanks west on a Sunday when half the US playerbase was still in church or in bed. That's not something that can be done organically under normal circumstances. Even most of this game's promotional material isn't images from live battles but staged stuff. I think that these are indicators of how hard it is to get a battles going.

As just one example look at bombing factories. It would be great to get on comms with friends and get in a big formation and go drop bombs and do well, because you are all organized. But in the air it's impossible to take time and quietly gather up a bomber formation behind the lines because the enemy will see the red square. Also every plane counts towards the spawn/capture penalties so 10 bombers with 20 escorts making a 1.5 hour mission would cripple your entire side on the ground. The current rules incentivize lone bomber attacks at odd hours when no one is online, not big formations and primetime raids. Despawning over fighting. It's more efficient to despawn after drop than to fight your way back, etc. That's just one aspect of the game that has potential, but is completely curtailed by game rules.

As a comparison in 20 minutes I can have a "small gang PvP roam" going in EVE Online. I have spent 20 minutes here working with other veteran players just trying to get an AO on a town. It's too much work for a too-predictable outcome.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Can you, or someone else here please demonstrate how to organize a big, fun, organized combined arms battle? Because I am certain that this is not possible under the current game rules; unless the defender simply doesn't spawn in or has no HC online the attacker gets rolled every time no matter how organized he is. Just post a how-to video or something.

@potthead You want to field that one, you are very good at doing just exactly that

2 people like this

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

As a comparison in 20 minutes I can have a "small gang PvP roam" going in EVE Online.

.........and roam another 20 min in 0.0 or J space and have no contact or action so that's 40 min......and when you die and your roaming fleet is 15-20 jumps away.........it take another 20 min to catch up if you don't get ganked on the way back.

Cant compare games. Sorry.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I have not yet had a chance to read this thread fully, but for now, the only thing that comes to mind is: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." There was really no reason to mess up this drastically with the supply levels and tiers, in such a short period of time.

Those kind of major changes that could affect game balance and therefore customer satisfaction should be, in my opinion, incrementally implemented, over the course of at least a few campaigns. That way the PB is not faced with the shock of a major transition, and has time to adapt to the new environment. Because a new style of play is needed to thrive with those changes. And it takes time to learn new styles of play, after years of balanced TOEs.

The main question, in my opinion, is if historical TOEs could improve game play. I have my doubts here, but I do believe that this is not an impossible task.

1 person likes this

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Can you, or someone else here please demonstrate how to organize a big, fun, organized combined arms battle? Because I am certain that this is not possible under the current game rules; unless the defender simply doesn't spawn in or has no HC online the attacker gets rolled every time no matter how organized he is. Just post a how-to video or something.

I came to the conclusion that things are too difficult awhile ago, and I think that I have provided pretty good reasoning as well as some evidence (my video of the Steam users getting spawncamped is still up). The response has always been for me to step it up and "use teamwork" but I don't see any examples of people successfully doing it. Meanwhile I can read and see how nearly every mechanic in the game is designed to remove any advantage that a larger organized group might have.

Xoom did organize a big event sometime last year, but it took several days of advertising and ingame announcement spam, augmented armor supply I think, and all he did really was roll a bunch of axis tanks west on a Sunday when half the US playerbase was still in church or in bed. That's not something that can be done organically under normal circumstances. Even most of this game's promotional material isn't images from live battles but staged stuff. I think that these are indicators of how hard it is to get a battles going.

As just one example look at bombing factories. It would be great to get on comms with friends and get in a big formation and go drop bombs and do well, because you are all organized. But in the air it's impossible to take time and quietly gather up a bomber formation behind the lines because the enemy will see the red square. Also every plane counts towards the spawn/capture penalties so 10 bombers with 20 escorts making a 1.5 hour mission would cripple your entire side on the ground. The current rules incentivize lone bomber attacks at odd hours when no one is online, not big formations and primetime raids. Despawning over fighting. It's more efficient to despawn after drop than to fight your way back, etc. That's just one aspect of the game that has potential, but is completely curtailed by game rules.

As a comparison in 20 minutes I can have a "small gang PvP roam" going in EVE Online. I have spent 20 minutes here working with other veteran players just trying to get an AO on a town. It's too much work for a too-predictable outcome.

The players in the past that did organize such game play just happened to be very charismatic, fun and very smart people.